FEAR or FAITH? FRIGHT or FLIGHT?Welcome Eagles to the New Crusade!Will thou help defend the Fortress of Faith?BOOKMARK us & check in DAILY for the latest Endtimes News!SPREAD WORD TO YOUR FRIENDS & FAMILY!

"And I beheld, and heard the voice of one eagle flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice: Woe, woe, woe to the inhabitants of the earth....[Apocalypse (Revelation) 8:13]

Monday, June 19, 2017

Archbishop Lefebvre: What is Tradition?

Archbishop Lefebvre: What is Tradition?

Vatican II does not equate to Tradition

Modernism is indeed what undermines the Church from within, today as
yesterday. Let us again quote from the encyclical Pascendi some typical
features which correspond with what we are experiencing now. “The
Modernists say that authority in the Church, since its end is purely
spiritual, should strip itself of all that external pomp, all those
pretentious adornments with which it parades itself in public. In this
they forget that religion, while it belongs to the soul, is not
exclusively for the soul and that the honor paid to authority is
reflected back on Christ who institutes it.”

It is under pressure
from these “speakers of novelties” that Paul VI abandoned the tiara,
bishops gave up the violet cassock and even the black, as well as their
rings, and priests appear in lay clothes, usually in a deliberately
casual style. There is nothing among the general reforms already put
into effect or insistently demanded that St. Pius X has not mentioned as
the “maniac” desires of the modernist reformers. You will recognize
them in this passage: “As regards worship (they want) to diminish the
number of external devotions or at least stop their increasing... Let
ecclesiastical government become democratic; let a share in the
government be given to the junior clergy and even the laity; let
authority be decentralized. Reform of the Roman Congregations, above all
the Holy Office and the Index... Finally there are those among them
who, echoing their Protestant masters, seek the suppression of priestly
celibacy.” Notice that the same demands are now being put forward and
that there is absolutely nothing original. As regards Christian thought
and the formation of future priests, the intention of the reformers of
St. Pius X’s time was the abandonment of scholastic philosophy among the
obsolete systems.” They advocate “that young people should be taught
modern philosophy, the only true philosophy, the only one suitable for
our times... that so-called rational theology should be based on modern
philosophy and positive theology on the history of dogmas.” In this
respect, the Modernists have got what they wanted and more. In what
passes for seminaries, they teach anthropology, psychoanalysis and Marx
in place of St. Thomas Aquinas. The principles of Thomist philosophy are
rejected in favor of vague systems which themselves recognize their
inability to explain the economy of the Universe, putting forward as
they do the philosophy of the absurd. One latter-day revolutionary, a
muddle-headed priest much heeded by intellectuals, who put sex at the
heart of everything, was bold enough to declare at public meetings: “The
scientific hypotheses of the ancients were pure nonsense and it is on
such nonsense that St. Thomas and Origen based their systems.”
Immediately afterwards, he fell into the absurdity of defining life as
“an evolutionary chain of biologically inexplicable facts.” How can he
know that, if it is inexplicable? How, I would add, can a priest discard
the only explanation, which is God?

The Modernists would be set
at naught if they had to defend their elaborate theories against the
principles of the Angelic Doctor, the notions of potency and act,
essence, substance and accidents, body and soul, etc. By eliminating
these notions they would render the theology of the Church
incomprehensible and, as one reads in the Motu Proprio Doctoris
Angelici, “the result is that students of the sacred disciplines no
longer even perceive the meaning of the words by which the dogmas which
God has revealed are propounded by the Magisterium.” The offensive
against scholastic philosophy is a necessary preliminary when one wants
to change dogma and attack Tradition.

But what is Tradition? It
seems to me that the word is often imperfectly understood. It is equated
to the “traditions” that exist in trades, in families and in civic
life: the “bouquet” fixed to the roof of a house when the last tile is
laid, the ribbon that is cut to open a monument, etc. That is not what I
am referring to: Tradition does not consist of the customs inherited
from the past and preserved out of loyalty to the past even where there
are no clear reasons for them. Tradition is defined as the Deposit of
Faith transmitted by the Magisterium down through the centuries. This
deposit is what has been given to us by Revelation; that is to say,
the Word of God entrusted to the Apostles and transmitted unfailingly
by their successors.

But now they want to get everyone inquiring,
searching, as if we had not been given the Creed, or as if Our Lord had
not come to bring us the Truth once and for all. What do they claim to
discover with all this inquiry? Catholics upon whom they would impose
these “questionings,” after having made them “abandon their
certainties,” should remember this: the deposit of Revelation concluded
at the death of the last Apostle. It is finished and it cannot be
touched until the end of time. Revelation is irreformable. The First
Vatican Council re-stated this explicitly: “for the doctrine of faith
which God has revealed has not been proposed, like a philosophical
invention, to be perfected by human ingenuity; but has been delivered as
a divine deposit to the Spouse of Christ (the Church) to be faithfully
kept and infallibly declared.”

But, one will object, the dogma
that makes Mary the Mother of God only dates back to the year 431,
transubstantiation to 1215, papal infallibility to 1870 and so on. Has
there not been an evolution? No, not at all. The dogmas which have been
defined in the course of the ages were contained in Revelation; the
Church has just made them explicit. When Pope Pius XII defined in 1950
the dogma of the Assumption, he said specifically that this truth of the
assumption into Heaven of the Virgin Mary, body and soul, was included
in the deposit of Revelation and already existed in the texts revealed
to us before the death of the last Apostle. We cannot bring anything new
into this field, we cannot add a single dogma, but only express those
that exist ever more clearly, more beautifully and more loftily.

That
is so certain that it forms the rule to follow in judging the errors
that are put before us every day, and rejecting them with no concession.
As Bossuet forcefully wrote: “When it is a matter of explaining the
principles of Christian morality and the essential dogmas of the Church
everything that does not appear in the Tradition of all time, and
especially the early times, is from then on not only suspect but wrong
and to be condemned; and this is the principal basis on which all the
holy Fathers of the Church, and Popes more than anyone, condemned false
doctrines, there being nothing more odious to the Roman Church than
novelties.”

The argument that is pressed upon the terrorized
faithful is this: “You are clinging to the past, you are being
nostalgic; live in your own time!” Some are abashed and do not know what
to reply. Nevertheless, the answer is easy: In this there is no past
or present or future. Truth belongs to all times, it is eternal.

In
order to break down Tradition they confront it with Holy Scripture,
after the manner of the Protestants, with the assertion that the Gospel
is the only book that counts. But Tradition came before the Gospel!
Although the Synoptic Gospels were not written nearly as late as some
would have us believe, a number of years had passed before the Four
Evangelists had completed their writing; but the Church already existed,
Pentecost had taken place and brought numerous conversions, 3000 on the
very day the Apostles came out of the Upper Room. What did they believe
just at that moment? How was Revelation transmitted if not by oral
tradition? One cannot subordinate Tradition to Holy Scripture, still
less reject it.

But do not imagine that, adopting this attitude,
they have an unlimited respect for the inspired text. They even dispute
that it is inspired in its entirety: “What is there in the Gospel which
is inspired? Only the truths that are necessary for our salvation.” In
consequence, the miracles, the accounts of the Holy Childhood, the
actions and conduct of Our Lord are relegated to the category of more or
less legendary biography. We fought in the Council over that phrase:
“Only the truths necessary for salvation.” There were some bishops in
favor of reducing the historical authenticity of the Gospels, which
shows the extent to which the clergy is corrupted by neo-Modernism.
Catholics should not allow themselves to be imposed upon: the whole of
the Gospel is inspired and those who wrote it had the Holy Ghost guiding
their intelligence, so that the whole of it is the Word of God, Verbum
Dei. It is not permissible to pick and choose and to say today: “We will
take this part but we don't want that part.” To choose is to be a
heretic, according to the Greek derivation of that word.

It
remains no less a fact that it is Tradition that transmits the Gospel to
us, and it appertains to Tradition, to the Magisterium, to explain to
us the contents of the Gospel. If we have nobody to interpret it for us,
we can reach several completely different understandings of the same
words of Christ. We then end up with the free interpretation of the
Protestants and the free inspiration of the present day charismatics
which leads us into pure fantasy.

All the dogmatic councils have
given us the exact expression of Tradition, the exact expression of what
the Apostles taught. Tradition is irreformable. One can never change
the decrees of the Council of Trent, because they are infallible,
written and published by an official act of the Church, unlike those of
Vatican II, which pronouncements are not infallible because the popes
did not wish to commit their infallibility. Therefore nobody can say to you, “You are clinging to the past, you have stayed with the Council of Trent.” For the Council of Trent is not the past. Tradition is clothed with a timeless character, adapted to all times and all places.﻿

DAILY NEWS- Scroll Thru The Latest News

Archbishop Lefebvre

“This Second Vatican Council Reform, since it has issued from Liberalism and from Modernism, is entirely corrupt; it comes from heresy and results in heresy, even if all its acts are not formally heretical. It is thus impossible for any faithful Catholic who is aware of these things to adopt this Reform, or to submit to it in any way at all. To ensure our salvation, the only attitude of fidelity to the Church and to Catholic doctrine, is a categorical refusal to accept the Reform.”

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Archbishop Lefebvre

“And we have the precise conviction that this new rite of Mass expresses a new faith, a faith which is not ours, a faith which is not the Catholic Faith. This New Mass is a symbol, is an expression, is an image of a new faith, of a Modernist faith. ….Now it is evident that the new rite, if I may say so, supposes another conception of the Catholic religion-another religion.”

TRADCATKNIGHT FORUM

FOLLOW TRADCATKNIGHT ON TUMBLR!

TCK Facebook

FOLLOW TRADCATKNIGHT ON PINTEREST

Archbishop Lefebvre

That Conciliar Church is a schismatic Church, because it breaks with the Catholic Church that has always been. It has its new dogmas, its new priesthood, its new institutions, its new worship, all already condemned by the Church in many a document, official and definitive.... The Church that affirms such errors is at once schismatic and heretical. This Conciliar Church is, therefore, not Catholic. To whatever extent Pope, Bishops, priests, or faithful adhere to this new Church, they separate themselves from the Catholic Church...

Fr. Hesse Summary on Vatican II

Vatican II = Heretical & Schismatic

Exposing Vatican II & New Mass, Fr. Villa

Archbishop Lefebvre

“Well, we are not of this religion. We do not accept this new religion. We are of the religion of all time; we are of the Catholic religion. We are not of this 'universal religion' as they call it today-this is not the Catholic religion any more. We are not of this Liberal, Modernist religion which has its own worship, its own priests, its own faith, its own catechisms, its own Bible, the 'ecumenical Bible'-these things we do not accept."

Traditional Quotes & Prayers

The Real 3rd Secret of Fatima

Inlcudes Vatican II and the soon Apostate Church..."...because Fatima is a very apocalyptic message. It says that no matter what happens there are going to be terrible wars, there are going to be diseases, whole nations are going to be wiped out, there are going to be 3 days darkness, there are going to be epidemics that will wipe out whole nations overnight, parts of the earth will be washed away at sea and violent tornadoes and storms. It's not a nice message at all." Fr Malachi Martin

SSPX Marian Corps Donations

Marian Corps-Australasia

Fr. Chazal

Fr. Girouard

Or send a cheque made out to Fr. Patrick Girouard at : P.O.Box 1543, Aldergrove, BC, V4W 2V1, Canada.

St. Marcel Initiative

Or, if you prefer, in the U.S., make your contribution by telephone, toll free: 855-4-S. Marcel (855.476.2723), or internationally, by sending your donation directly to donations@stmarcelinitiative.com via PayPal.

TCK TESTIMONIALS

Eric Gajewski, Founder of DefeatModernism(formerly known as Defeat the Heresies)

Resistance Forum

True Traditionalist Forum

Pope XII: “Suicide Of Altering the Faith In Her Liturgy…..”

"I am worried by the Blessed Virgin's messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul. … I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past."A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God. In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them. Like Mary Magdalene, weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask, 'Where have they taken Him?'"

ALEXA RANK

Find The Rank Of Any Website

Current Crusaders Online Worldwide (RealTime)

St. Bernard:

Go forth confidently then, you knights, and repel the foes of the cross of Christ with a stalwart heart. Know that neither death nor life can separate you from the love of God which is in Jesus Christ, and in every peril repeat, "Whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's." What a glory to return in victory from such a battle! How blessed to die there as a martyr! Rejoice, brave athlete, if you live and conquer in the Lord; but glory and exult even more if you die and join your Lord. Life indeed is a fruitful thing and victory is glorious, but a holy death is more important than either. If they are blessed who die in the Lord, how much more are they who die for the Lord!

How secure, I say, is life when death is anticipated without fear; or rather when it is desired with feeling and embraced with reverence! How holy and secure this knighthood and how entirely free of the double risk run by those men who fight not for Christ! Whenever you go forth, O worldly warrior, you must fear lest the bodily death of your foe should mean your own spiritual death, or lest perhaps your body and soul together should be slain by him.

Indeed, danger or victory for a Christian depends on the dispositions of his heart and not on the fortunes of war. If he fights for a good reason, the issue of his fight can never be evil; and likewise the results can never be considered good if the reason were evil and the intentions perverse. If you happen to be killed while you are seeking only to kill another, you die a murderer. If you succeed, and by your will to overcome and to conquer you perchance kill a man, you live a murderer. Now it will not do to be a murderer, living or dead, victorious or vanquished. What an unhappy victory--to have conquered a man while yielding to vice, and to indulge in an empty glory at his fall when wrath and pride have gotten the better of you!

But what of those who kill neither in the heat of revenge nor in the swelling of pride, but simply in order to save themselves? Even this sort of victory I would not call good, since bodily death is really a lesser evil than spiritual death. The soul need not die when the body does. No, it is the soul which sins that shall die.

The knight of Christ, I say, may strike with confidence and die yet more confidently, for he serves Christ when he strikes, and serves himself when he falls. Neither does he bear the sword in vain, for he is God's minister, for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of the good. If he kills an evildoer, he is not a mankiller, but, if I may so put it, a killer of evil. He is evidently the avenger of Christ towards evildoers and he is rightly considered a defender of Christians. Should he be killed himself, we know that he has not perished, but has come safely into port.

Once he finds himself in the thick of battle, this knight sets aside his previous gentleness, as if to say, "Do I not hate those who hate you, O Lord; am I not disgusted with your enemies?" These men at once fall violently upon the foe, regarding them as so many sheep. No matter how outnumbered they are, they never regard these as fierce barbarians or as awe-inspiring hordes. Nor do they presume on their own strength, but trust in the Lord of armies to grant them the victory.

.

.

Saint Athanasius

"May God console you! ... What saddens you ... is the fact that others have occupied the churches by violence, while during this time you are on the outside. It is a fact that they have the premises – but you have the Apostolic Faith. They can occupy our churches, but they are outside the true Faith. You remain outside the places of worship, but the Faith dwells within you. Let us consider: what is more important, the place or the Faith?The true Faith, obviously. Who has lost and who has won in the struggle – the one who keeps the premises or the one who keeps the Faith? True, the premises are good when the Apostolic Faith is preached there; they are holy if everything takes place there in a holy way ..."You are the ones who are happy; you who remain within the Church by your Faith, who hold firmly to the foundations of the Faith which has come down to you from Apostolic Tradition. And if an execrable jealousy has tried to shake it on a number of occasions, it has not succeeded. They are the ones who have broken away from it in the present crisis. No one, ever, will prevail against your Faith, beloved Brothers. And we believe that God will give us our churches back some day. "Thus, the more violently they try to occupy the places of worship, the more they separate themselves from the Church. They claim that they represent the Church; but in reality, they are the ones who are expelling themselves from it and going astray. Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ."